Chapter XVII: Part 1: with Heywood, Dec. 1602–Jan. 1603; one payment had been made to (5)

There is also an Epilogue, which shows that both parts were revived. The piracy may serve to date the original production in 1605 and the Caroline revival probably led to the reprints of 1632. As the play passed to the Cockpit, it was presumably written for Queen Anne’s. Greg (_Henslowe_, ii. 223) rightly resists the suggestion that it was the old _Philip of Spain_ bought by the Admiral’s from Alleyn in 1602. It is only Part i which has characteristics attributable to stenography, and this remained unrevised. According to Van Dam and Stoffel, the 1606 and 1632 editions of Part ii represent the same original text, in the first case shortened for representation, in the second altered by a press-corrector.

_Fortune by Land and Sea. c. 1607_ (?)

_With_ W. Rowley.

_S. R._ 1655, June 20. ‘Fortune by Land & sea, a tragicomedie, written by Tho: Heywood & Wm. Rowley.’ _John Sweeting_ (Eyre, i. 486).

1655. Fortune by Land and Sea. A Tragi-Comedy. As it was Acted with great Applause by the Queens Servants. Written by Tho. Haywood and William Rowly. _For John Sweeting and Robert Pollard._

_Edition_ by B. Field (1846, _Sh. Soc._).--_Dissertation_: Oxoniensis, _Illustration of Fortune by Land and Sea_ (1847, _Sh. Soc. Papers_, iii. 7).

The action is placed in the reign of Elizabeth (cf. ed. Pearson, vi, pp. 409, 431), but this may be due merely to the fact that the source is a pamphlet (S. R. 15 Aug. 1586) dealing with Elizabethan piracy. Rowley’s co-operation suggests the date 1607–9 when he was writing for Queen Anne’s men, and other trifling evidence (Aronstein, 237) makes such a date plausible.

_The Rape of Lucrece. 1603 < > 8_

_S. R._ 1608, June 3 (Buck). ‘A Booke called A Romane tragedie called The Rape of Lucrece.’ _John Busby and Nathanael Butter_ (Arber, iii. 380).

1608. The Rape of Lucrece. A True Roman Tragedie. With the seuerall Songes in their apt places, by Valerius, the merrie Lord amongst the Roman Peeres. Acted by her Maiesties Seruants at the Red Bull, neare Clarkenwell. Written by Thomas Heywood. _For I. B._ [Epistle to the Reader, signed ‘T. H.’]

1609. _For I. B._

1630.... The fourth Impression.... _For Nathaniel Butter._

1638.... The copy revised, and sundry Songs before omitted, now inserted in their right places.... _John Raworth for Nathaniel Butter._ [Note to the Reader at end.]

_Edition_ in 1825 (_O. E. D._ i).

Fleay, i. 292, notes the mention of ‘the King’s head’ as a tavern sign for ‘the Gentry’, which suggests a Jacobean date. The play was given at Court, apparently by the King’s and Queen’s men together, on 13 Jan. 1612. The Epistle says that it has not been Heywood’s custom ‘to commit my Playes to the Presse’, like others who ‘have used a double sale of their labours, first to the Stage, and after to the Presse’. He now does so because ‘some of my Playes have (unknowne to me, and without any of my direction) accidentally come into the Printers hands (and therefore so corrupt and mangled, copied only by the eare) that I have beene as unable to knowe them, as ashamed to challenge them’. A play on the subject seems to have been on tour in Germany in 1619 (Herz, 98). _The Rape of Lucrece_ was on the Cockpit stage in 1628, according to a newsletter in _Athenaeum_ (1879), ii. 497, and to the 1638 edition are appended songs ‘added by the stranger that lately acted Valerius his part’. It is in the Cockpit list of plays in 1639 (_Variorum_, iii. 159).

_The Golden Age > 1611_

_S. R._ 1611, Oct. 14 (Buck). William Barrenger, ‘A booke called, The golden age with the liues of Jupiter and Saturne.’ _William Barrenger_ (Arber, iii. 470).

1611. The Golden Age. Or The liues of Iupiter and Saturne, with the defining of the Heathen Gods. As it hath beene sundry times acted at the Red Bull, by the Queenes Maiesties Seruants. Written by Thomas Heywood. _For William Barrenger._ [Epistle to the Reader, signed ‘T. H.’ Some copies have ‘defining’ corrected to ‘deifying’ in the title.]

_Edition_ by J. P. Collier (1851, _Sh. Soc._).

The Epistle describes the play as ‘the eldest brother of three Ages, that haue aduentured the Stage, but the onely yet, that hath beene iudged to the presse’, and promises the others. It came to the press ‘accidentally’, but Heywood, ‘at length hauing notice thereof’, prefaced it, as it had ‘already past the approbation of auditors’. Fleay, i. 283, followed hesitatingly by Greg (_Henslowe_, ii. 175), thinks it a revision of the _Olympo_ or _Seleo & Olempo_, which he interprets _Coelo et Olympo_, produced by the Admiral’s on 5 March 1595. The Admiral’s inventories show that they had a play with Neptune in it, but it is only at the very end of _The Golden Age_ that the sons of Saturn draw lots and Jupiter wins Heaven or Olympus. Fleay’s assumption that the play was revised _c._ 1610, because of Dekker, _If it be not Good_, i. 1, ‘The Golden Age is moulding new again’, is equally hazardous.

_The Silver Age > 1612_

1613. The Silver Age, Including. The loue of Iupiter to Alcmena: The birth of Hercules. And the Rape of Proserpine. Concluding, With the Arraignement of the Moone. Written by Thomas Heywood. _Nicholas Okes, sold by Beniamin Lightfoote._ [Epistle to the Reader, signed ‘T. H,’; Prologue and Epilogue.]

_Edition_ by J. P. Collier (1851, _Sh. Soc._).

The Epistle says, ‘Wee begunne with _Gold_, follow with _Siluer_, proceede with _Brasse_, and purpose by Gods grace, to end with _Iron_’. Fleay, i. 283, and Greg (_Henslowe_, ii. 175) take this and _The Brazen Age_ to be the two parts of the anonymous _Hercules_, produced by the Admiral’s men on 7 and 23 May 1595 respectively. It may be so. But the text presumably represents the play as given at Court, apparently by the King’s and Queen’s men together, on 12 Jan. 1612. An Anglo-German _Amphitryo_ traceable in 1626 and 1678 may be based on Heywood’s work (Herz, 66; _Jahrbuch_, xli. 201).

_The Brazen Age > 1613_

1613. The Brazen Age, The first Act containing, The death of the Centaure Nessus, The Second, The Tragedy of Meleager: The Third The Tragedy of Iason and Medea. The Fourth. Vulcans Net. The Fifth. The Labours and death of Hercules: Written by Thomas Heywood. _Nicholas Okes for Samuel Rand._ [Epistle to the Reader; Prologue and Epilogue.]

Cf. s.v. _The Silver Age_.

_The Iron Age. c. 1613_ (?)

1632. [_Part i_] The Iron Age: Contayning the Rape of Hellen: The siege of Troy: The Combate betwixt Hector and Aiax: Hector and Troilus slayne by Achilles: Achilles slaine by Paris: Aiax and Vlesses contend for the Armour of Achilles: The Death of Aiax, &c. Written by Thomas Heywood. _Nicholas Okes._ [Epistles to Thomas Hammon and to the Reader, signed ‘Thomas Heywood’.]

1632. [_Part ii_] The Second Part of the Iron Age. Which contayneth the death of Penthesilea, Paris, Priam, and Hecuba: The burning of Troy: The deaths of Agamemnon, Menelaus, Clitemnestra, Hellena, Orestes, Egistus, Pillades, King Diomed, Pyrhus, Cethus, Synon, Thersites, &c. Written by Thomas Heywood. _Nicholas Okes._ [Epistles to the Reader and to Thomas Mannering, signed ‘Thomas Heywood’.]

_Dissertation_: R. G. Martin, _A New Specimen of the Revenge Play_ (1918, _M. P._ xvi. 1).

The Epistles tell us that ‘these were the playes often (and not with the least applause,) Publickely Acted by two Companies, vppon one Stage at once, and haue at sundry times thronged three seuerall Theaters, with numerous and mighty Auditories’; also that they ‘haue beene long since Writ’. This, however, was in 1632, and I can only read the Epistles to the earlier _Ages_ as indicating that the _Iron Age_ was contemplated, but not yet in existence, up to 1613. I should therefore put the play _c._ 1613, and take the three theatres at which it was given to be the Curtain, Red Bull, and Cockpit. Fleay, i. 285, thinks that Part i was the anonymous _Troy_ produced by the Admiral’s on 22 June 1596. More plausible is the conjecture of Greg (_Henslowe_, ii. 180) that this was ‘an earlier and shorter version later expanded into the two-part play’. Spencer had a play on the Destruction of Troy at Nuremberg in 1613 (Herz, 66).

_Pleasant Dialogues and Dramas. 1630–6_ (?)

_S. R._ 1635, Aug. 29 (Weekes). ‘A booke called Pleasant Dialogues and Dramma’s selected out of Lucian Erasmus Textor Ovid &c. by Thomas Heywood.’ _Richard Hearne_ (Arber, iv. 347).

1637. Pleasant Dialogues and Dramma’s, selected out of Lucian, Erasmus, Textor, Ovid, &c. With sundry Emblems extracted from the most elegant Iacobus Catsius. As also certaine Elegies, Epitaphs, and Epithalamions or Nuptiall Songs; Anagrams and Acrosticks; With divers Speeches (upon severall occasions) spoken to their most Excellent Majesties, King Charles, and Queene Mary. With other Fancies translated from Beza, Bucanan, and sundry Italian Poets. By Tho. Heywood. _R. O. for R. H., sold by Thomas Slater._ [Epistle to the Generous Reader, signed ‘Tho. Heywood’, and Congratulatory Poems by Sh. Marmion, D. E., and S. N.]

_Edition_ by W. Bang (1903, _Materialien_, iii).

The section called ‘Sundry Fancies writ upon severall occasions’ (Bang, 231) includes a number of Prologues and Epilogues, of which those which are datable fall between 1630 and 1636. Bang regards all the contents of the volume as of about this period. Fleay, i. 285, had suggested that _Deorum Judicium_, _Jupiter and Io_, _Apollo and Daphne_, _Amphrisa_, and possibly _Misanthropos_ formed the anonymous _Five Plays in One_ produced by the Admiral’s on 7 April 1597, and also that _Misanthropos_, which he supposed to bear the name _Time’s Triumph_, was played with _Faustus_ on 13 April 1597 and carelessly entered by Henslowe as ‘times triumpe & fortus’. Greg (_Henslowe_, ii. 183) says of the _Dialogues and Dramas_, ‘many of the pieces in that collection are undoubtedly early’. He rejects Fleay’s views as to _Misanthropos_ on the grounds that it is ‘unrelieved tediousness’ and has no claim to the title _Time’s Triumph_, and is doubtful as to _Deorum Judicium_. The three others he seems inclined to accept as possibly belonging to the 1597 series, especially _Jupiter and Io_, where the unappropriated head of Argus in one of the Admiral’s inventories tempts him. He is also attracted by an alternative suggestion of Fleay’s that one of the _Five Plays in One_ may have been a _Cupid and Psyche_, afterwards worked up into _Love’s Mistress_ (1636). This he says, ‘if it existed’, would suit very well. Unfortunately, there is no evidence that it did exist. Moreover, P. A. Daniel has shown that certain lines found in _Love’s Mistress_ are assigned to Dekker in _England’s Parnassus_ (1600, ed. Crawford, xxxi. 509, 529) and must be from the _Cupid and Psyche_ produced by the Admiral’s _c._ June 1600 (_Henslowe_, ii. 212). There is no indication that Heywood collaborated with Dekker, Chettle, and Day in this; but it occurs to me that, if he was still at the Rose, he may have acted in the play and cribbed years afterwards from the manuscript of his part. I will only add that _Misanthropos_ and _Deorum Judicium_ seem to me out of the question. They belong to the series of ‘dialogues’ which Heywood in his Epistle clearly treats as distinct from the ‘dramas’, for after describing them he goes on, ‘For such as delight in Stage-poetry, here are also divers Dramma’s, never before published: Which, though some may condemne for their shortnesse, others againe will commend for their sweetnesse’. It is only _Jupiter and Io_ and _Apollo and Daphne_, which are based on Ovid, and _Amphrisa_, for which there is no known source, that can belong to this group; and Heywood gives no indication as to their date.

_Lost and Doubtful Plays_

On _How to Learn of a Woman to Woo_, see s.v. _The Wise Woman of Hogsden_. The author of _The Second Part of Hudibras_ (1663) names Heywood as the author of _The Bold Beauchamps_, which is mentioned with _Jane Shore_ in _The Knight of the Burning Pestle_, Ind. 59.

The following is a complete list of the plays, by Heywood or conjecturally assigned to him, which are recorded in Henslowe’s diary:

_Possible plays for the Admiral’s, 1594–7_

For conjectures as to the authorship by Heywood of _Godfrey of Bulloigne_ (1594), _The Siege of London_ (>1594), _Wonder of a Woman_ (1595), _Seleo and Olympo_ (1595), _1, 2 Hercules_ (1595), _Troy_ (1596), _Five Plays in One_ (1597), _Time’s Triumph_ (>1597), see _The Four Prentices_, the anonymous _Edward IV_, W. Rowley’s _A New Wonder_, _The Golden Age_, _The Silver Age_, _The Iron Age_, _Pleasant Dialogues and Dramas_.

_Plays for the Admiral’s, 1598–1603_

(i) _War without Blows and Love without Suit._

Dec. 1598–Jan. 1599; identified, not plausibly, by Fleay, i. 287, with the anonymous _Thracian Wonder_ (q.v.).

(ii) _Joan as Good as my Lady._

Feb. 1599, identified, conjecturally, by Fleay, i. 298, with _A Maidenhead Well Lost_, printed as Heywood’s in 1634.

(iii) _1 The London Florentine._

With Chettle, Dec. 1602–Jan. 1603.

_Plays for Worcester’s, 1602–3_

(iv) _Albere Galles._

With Smith, Sept. 1602, possibly identical with the anonymous _Nobody and Somebody_ (q.v.).

(v) _Cutting Dick_ (additions only).

Sept. 1602, identified by Fleay, ii. 319, with the anonymous _Trial of Chivalry_, but not plausibly (Greg, _Henslowe_, ii. 231).

(vi) _Marshal Osric._

With Smith, Sept. 1602, conceivably identical with _The Royal King and the Loyal Subject_ (q.v.).

(vii) _1 Lady Jane._

With Chettle, Dekker, Smith, and Webster, Oct. 1602, doubtless represented by the extant _Sir Thomas Wyatt_ of Dekker (q.v.) and Webster, in which, however, Heywood’s hand has not been traced.

(viii) _Christmas Comes but Once a Year_.

With Chettle, Dekker, and Webster, Nov. 1602.

(ix) _The Blind Eats many a Fly_.

Nov. 1602–Jan. 1603.

(x) [Unnamed play.]

With Chettle, Jan. 1603, but apparently not finished, or possibly identical with the _Shore_ of Chettle (q.v.) and Day. The title _Like Quits Like_, inserted into one entry for this play, is a forgery (Greg, _Henslowe_, i. xliii).

(xi) _A Woman Killed With Kindness_.

Feb.–March 1603. _Vide supra._

Heywood’s hand or ‘finger’ has also been suggested in the _Appius and Virginia_ printed as Webster’s (q.v.), in _Pericles_, and in _Fair Maid of the Exchange_, _George a Greene_, _How a Man May Choose a Good Wife from a Bad_, _Thomas Lord Cromwell_, and _Work for Cutlers_ (cf. ch. xxiv).

GRIFFIN HIGGS (1589–1659).

A student at St. John’s, Oxford (1606), afterwards Fellow of Merton (1611), Chaplain to Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia (1627), and Dean of Lichfield (1638). The MS. of _The Christmas Prince_ (_1607_) was once thought to be in his handwriting (cf. ch. xxiv, C).

THOMAS HUGHES (_c._ 1588).

A Cheshire man, who matriculated from Queens’ College, Cambridge, in Nov. 1571 and became Fellow of the College on 8 Sept. 1576.

_The Misfortunes of Arthur. 28 Feb. 1588_

1587. Certain deuises and shewes presented to her Maiestie by the Gentlemen of Grayes Inne at her Highnesse Court in Greenewich, the twenty-eighth day of Februarie in the thirtieth yeare of her Maiesties most happy Raigne. _Robert Robinson._ [‘An Introduction penned by Nicholas Trotte Gentleman one of the society of Grayes Inne’; followed by ‘The misfortunes of Arthur (Vther Pendragons Sonne) reduced into Tragicall notes by Thomas Hughes one of the societie of Grayes Inne. And here set downe as it past from vnder his handes and as it was presented, excepting certaine wordes and lines, where some of the Actors either helped their memories by brief omission: or fitted their acting by some alteration. With a note at the ende, of such speaches as were penned by others in lue of some of these hereafter following’; Arguments, Dumb-Shows, and Choruses between the Acts; at end, two substituted speeches ‘penned by William Fulbecke gentleman, one of the societie of Grayes Inne’; followed by ‘Besides these speaches there was also penned a Chorus for the first act, and an other for the second act, by Maister Frauncis Flower, which were pronounced accordingly. The dumbe showes were partly deuised by Maister Christopher Yeluerton, Maister Frauncis Bacon, Maister Iohn Lancaster and others, partly by the saide Maister Flower, who with Maister Penroodocke and the said Maister Lancaster directed these proceedings at Court.’]

_Editions_ in Collier, _Five Old Plays_ (1833), and Dodsley^4 (1874, iv), and by H. C. Grumbine (1900), J. S. Farmer (1911, _T. F. T._), and J. W. Cunliffe (1912, _E. E. C. T._).

Of the seven collaborators, three--Bacon, Yelverton, and Fulbecke--subsequently attained distinction. It is to be wished that editors of more important plays had been as communicative as offended dignity, or some other cause, made Thomas Hughes.

WILLIAM HUNNIS (?-1597).

[Nearly all that is known of Hunnis, except as regards his connexion with the Blackfriars, and much that is conjectural has been gathered and fully illustrated by Mrs. C. C. Stopes in _Athenaeum_ and _Shakespeare-Jahrbuch_ papers, and finally in _William Hunnis and the Revels of the Chapel Royal_ (1910, _Materialien_, xxix).]

The date of Hunnis’s birth is unknown, except as far as it can be inferred from the reference to him as ‘in winter of thine age’ in 1578. He is described on the title-page of his translation of _Certayne Psalmes_ (1550) as ‘seruant’ to Sir William Herbert, who became Earl of Pembroke. He is in the lists of the Gentlemen of the Chapel about 1553, but he took part in plots against Mary and in 1556 was sent to the Tower. He lost his post, but this was restored between Elizabeth’s accession in 1558 and the opening of the extant _Cheque Book_ of the Chapel in 1561, and on 15 Nov. 1566 he was appointed Master of the Children in succession to Richard Edwardes (q.v.). For the history of his Mastership, cf. ch. xii (Chapel). Early in 1559 he married Margaret, widow of Nicholas Brigham, Teller of the Exchequer, through whom he acquired a life-interest in the secularized Almonry at Westminster. She died in June 1559, and about 1560 Hunnis married Agnes Blancke, widow of a Grocer. He took out the freedom of the Grocers’ Company, and had a shop in Southwark. He was elected to the livery of the Company in 1567, but disappears from its records before 1586. In 1569 he obtained a grant of arms, and is described as of Middlesex. From 1576–85, however, he seems to have had a house at Great Ilford, Barking, Essex. His only known child, Robin, was page to Walter Earl of Essex in Ireland, and is said in _Leicester’s Commonwealth_ to have tasted the poison with which Leicester killed Essex in 1576 and to have lost his hair. But he became a Rider of the Stable under Leicester as Master of the Horse during 1579–83, and received payments for posting services in later years up to 1593. In 1562 William Hunnis became Keeper of the Orchard and Gardens at Greenwich, and held this post with his Mastership to his death. He supplied greenery and flowers for the Banqueting Houses of 1569 and 1571 (cf. ch. i). In 1570 the Queen recommended him to the City as Taker of Tolls and Dues on London Bridge, and his claim was bought off for £40. In 1583 he called attention to the poor remuneration of the Mastership, and in 1585 he received grants of land at Great Ilford and elsewhere. He died on 6 June 1597.

Hunnis published several volumes of moral and religious verse, original and translated: _Certayne Psalmes_ (1550); _A Godly new Dialogue of Christ and a Sinner_ (S. R. 1564, if this is rightly identified with the _Dialogue_ of Hunnis’s 1583 volume); _A Hive Full of Honey_ (1578, S. R. 1 Dec. 1577, dedicated to Leicester); _A Handful of Honnisuckles_ (N.D., S. R. 11 Dec. 1578, a New Year’s gift to the Ladies of the Privy Chamber); _Seven Sobbes of a Sorrowful Soule for Sinne_ (1583, S. R. 7 Nov. 1581, with the _Handful of Honnisuckles_, _The Widow’s Mite_, and _A Comfortable Dialogue between Christ and a Sinner_, dedicated to Lady Sussex); _Hunnies Recreations_ (1588, S. R. 4 Dec. 1587, dedicated to Sir Thomas Heneage). Several poems by Hunnis are also with those of Richard Edwardes and others in _The Paradyse of Daynty Deuises_ (1567); one, the _Nosegay_, in Clement Robinson’s _A Handfull of Pleasant Delites_ (1584); and it is usual to assign to him two bearing the initials W. H., _Wodenfride’s Song in Praise of Amargana_ and _Another of the Same_, in _England’s Helicon_ (1600).

The name of no play by Hunnis has been preserved, although he may probably enough have written some of those produced by the Chapel boys during his Mastership. That he was a dramatist is testified to by the following lines contributed by Thomas Newton, one of the translators of Seneca, to his _Hive Full of Honey_.

In prime of youth thy pleasant Penne depaincted Sonets sweete,
Delightfull to the greedy Eare, for youthfull Humour meete.
Therein appeared thy pregnant wit, and store of fyled Phraze
Enough t’ astoune the doltish Drone, and lumpish Lout amaze,
Thy Enterludes, thy gallant Layes, thy Rond’letts and thy Songes,
Thy Nosegay and thy Widowes’ Mite, with that thereto belonges....
... Descendinge then in riper years to stuffe of further reache,
Thy schooled Quill by deeper skill did graver matters teache,
And now to knit a perfect Knot; In winter of thine age
Such argument thou chosen hast for this thy Style full sage.
As far surmounts the Residue.

Newton’s account of his friend’s poetic evolution seems to assign his ‘enterludes’ to an early period of mainly secular verse; but if this preceded his _Certayne Psalmes_ of 1550, which are surely of ‘graver matters’, it must have gone back to Henry VIII’s reign, far away from his Mastership. On the other hand, Hunnis was certainly contributing secular verse and devices to the Kenilworth festivities (cf. s.v. Gascoigne) only three years before Newton wrote. Mrs. Stopes suggests, with some plausibility, that the Amargana songs of _England’s Helicon_ may come from an interlude. She also assigns to Hunnis, by conjecture, _Godly Queen Hester_, in which stress is laid on Hester’s Chapel Royal, and _Jacob and Esau_ (1568, S. R. 1557–8), which suggests gardens.

LEONARD HUTTEN (_c._ 1557–1632).

Possibly the author of the academic _Bellum Grammaticale_ (cf. App. K).

THOMAS INGELEND.

Lee (_D. N. B._) conjecturally identifies Ingelend with a man of the same name who married a Northamptonshire heiress.

_The Disobedient Child, c. 1560_

_S. R._ 1569–70. ‘An enterlude for boyes to handle and to passe tyme at christinmas.’ _Thomas Colwell_ (Arber, i. 398). [The method of exhaustions points to this as the entry of the play.]

N.D. A pretie and Mery new Enterlude: called the Disobedient Child. Compiled by Thomas Ingelend late Student in Cambridge. _Thomas Colwell._

_Editions_ by J. O. Halliwell (1848, _Percy Soc._ lxxv), in Dodsley^4 (1874, ii), and by J. S. Farmer (1908, _T. F. T._).--_Dissertation_: F. Holthausen, _Studien zum älteren englischen Drama_ (1902, _E. S._ xxxi. 90).

J. Bolte, _Vahlen-Festschrift_, 594, regards this as a translation of the _Iuvenis, Pater, Uxor_ of J. Ravisius Textor (_Dialogi_, ed. 1651, 71), which Holthausen reprints, but which is only a short piece in one scene. Brandl, lxxiii, traces the influence of the _Studentes_ (1549) of Christopherus Stymmelius (Bahlmann, _Lat. Dr._ 98). The closing prayer is for Elizabeth.

JAMES I (1566–1625).

_An Epithalamion on the Marquis of Huntly’s Marriage.
21 July 1588_

R. S. Rait, _Lusus Regis_ (1901), 2, printed from _Bodleian MS._ 27843 verses by James I, which he dated _c._ 1581. The occasion and correct date are supplied by another text, with a title, in A. F. Westcott, _New Poems of James I_ (1911). The bridal pair were George Gordon, 6th Earl and afterwards 1st Marquis of Huntly, and Henrietta Stuart, daughter of Esme, Duke of Lennox. The verses consist of a hymeneal dialogue, with a preliminary invocation by the writer, and speeches by Mercury, Nimphes, Agrestis, Skolar, Woman, The Vertuouse Man, Zani, The Landvart Gentleman, The Soldat. The earlier lines seem intended to accompany a tilting at the ring or some such contest, but at l. 74 is a reference to the coming of ‘strangers in a maske’.

Westcott, lviii, says that James helped William Fowler in devising a mimetic show for the banquet at the baptism of Prince Henry on 23 Aug. 1594.

JOHN JEFFERE (?-?).

Nothing is known of him, beyond his possible authorship of the following play:

_The Bugbears. 1563 <_

[_MS._] _Lansdowne MS._ 807, f. 57. [The MS. contains the relics of John Warburton’s collection, and on a slip once attached to the fly-leaf is his famous list of burnt plays, which includes ‘Bugbear C. Jo^n. Geffrey’ (Greg in _3 Library_, ii. 232). It appears to be the work of at least five hands, of which one, acting as a corrector, as well as a scribe, may be that of the author. The initials J. B. against a line or two inserted at the end do not appear to be his, but, as there was no single scribe, he may be writer of a final note to the text, written in printing characters, ‘Soli deo honor et gloria Johannus Jeffere scribebat hoc’. This note is followed by the songs and their music, and at the top of the first is written ‘Giles peperel for Iphiginia’. On the last page are the names ‘Thomas Ba ...’ and ‘Frances Whitton’, which probably do not indicate authorship. A title-page may be missing, and a later hand has written at the head of the text, ‘The Buggbears’.]

_Editions_ by C. Grabau (1896–7, _Archiv_, xcviii. 301; xcix. 311) and R. W. Bond (1911, _E. P. I._).--_Dissertation_: W. Dibelius (_Archiv_, cxii. 204).

The play is an adaptation of A. F. Grazzini, _La Spiritata_ (1561), and uses also material from J. Weier (_De Praestigiis Daemonum_) (1563) and from the life of Michel de Nôtredame (Nostradamus), not necessarily later than his death in 1566. Bond is inclined to date the play, partly on metrical grounds, about 1564 or 1565. Grabau and Dibelius suggest a date after 1585, apparently under the impression that the name Giles in the superscription to the music may indicate the composition of Nathaniel Giles, of the Chapel Royal, who took his Mus. Bac. in 1585. But the name, whether of a composer, or of the actor of the part of Iphigenia, is Giles Peperel. The performers were ‘boyes’, but the temptation to identify the play with the _Effiginia_ shown by Paul’s at Court on 28 Dec. 1571 is repressed by the description of _Effiginia_ in the Revels account as a ‘tragedye’, whereas _The Bugbears_ is a comedy. Moreover, Iphigenia is not a leading part, although one added by the English adapter.

LAURENCE JOHNSON (_c._ 1577).

A possible author of _Misogonus_ (cf. ch. xxiv).

BENJAMIN JONSON (1572–1637).

Benjamin Johnson, or Jonson, as he took the fancy to spell his name, was born, probably on 11 June 1572, at Westminster, after the death of his father, a minister, of Scottish origin. He was withheld, or withdrawn, from the University education justified by his scholastic attainments at Westminster to follow his step-father’s occupation of bricklaying, and when this proved intolerable, he served as a soldier in the Netherlands. In a prologue to _The Sad Shepherd_, left unfinished at his death in August 1637, he describes himself as ‘He that has feasted you these forty years’, and by 1597 at latest his connexion with the stage had begun. Aubrey tells us (ii. 12, 226) that he ‘acted and wrote, but both ill, at the Green Curtaine, a kind of nursery or obscure play-house, somewhere in the suburbes (I thinke towards Shoreditch or Clarkenwell)’, and again that he ‘was never a good actor, but an excellent instructor’. The earliest contemporary records, however, show Jonson not at the Curtain, but on the Bankside. On 28 July 1597 Henslowe (i. 200) recorded a personal loan to ‘Bengemen Johnson player’ of £4 ‘to be payd yt agayne when so euer ether I or any for me shall demande yt’, and on the very same day he opened on another page of his diary (i. 47) an account headed ‘Received of Bengemenes Johnsones share as ffoloweth 1597’ and entered in it the receipt of a single sum of 3_s._ 9_d._, to which no addition was ever made. Did these entries stand alone, one would infer, on the analogy of other transactions of Henslowe’s and from the signatures of two Admiral’s men as witnesses to the loan, that Jonson had purchased a share in the Admiral’s company for £4, that he borrowed the means to do this from Henslowe, and that Henslowe was to recoup himself by periodical deductions from the takings of the company as they passed through his hands. But there is no other evidence that Jonson ever had an interest in the Admiral’s, and there are facts which, if one could believe that Henslowe would regard the takings of any company but the Admiral’s as security for a loan, would lead to the conclusion that Jonson’s ‘share’ was with Pembroke’s men at the Swan. The day of Henslowe’s entries, 28 July 1597, is the very day on which the theatres were suppressed as a result of the performance of _The Isle of Dogs_ (cf. App. D, No. cx), and it is hardly possible to doubt that Jonson was one of the actors who had a hand with Nashe (q.v.) in that play. The Privy Council registers record his release, with Shaw and Spencer of Pembroke’s men, from the Marshalsea on 3 Oct. 1597 (Dasent, xxviii. 33; cf. App. D, No. cxii); while Dekker in _Satiromastix_ (l. 1513) makes Horace admit that he had played Zulziman in Paris Garden, and Tucca upbraid him because ‘when the Stagerites banisht thee into the Ile of Dogs, thou turn’dst Bandog (villanous Guy) & ever since bitest’. The same passage confirms Aubrey’s indication that Jonson was actor, and a bad actor, as well as poet. ‘Thou putst vp a supplication’, says Tucca, ‘to be a poor iorneyman player, and hadst beene still so, but that thou couldst not set a good face vpon ’t: thou hast forgot how thou amblest (in leather pilch) by a play-wagon, in the high way, and took’st mad Ieronimoes part, to get seruice among the mimickes.’ Elsewhere (l. 633) Tucca taunts him that ‘when thou ranst mad for the death of Horatio, thou borrowedst a gowne of Roscius the stager, (that honest Nicodemus) and sentst it home lowsie’. This imprisonment for the _Isle of Dogs_ is no doubt the ‘bondage’ for his ‘first error’ to which Jonson refers in writing to Salisbury about _Eastward Ho!_ in 1605, and the ‘close imprisonment, under Queen Elizabeth’, during which he told Drummond he was beset by spies (Laing, 19). Released, Jonson borrowed 5_s._ more from Henslowe (i. 200) on 5 Jan. 1598, and entered into a relationship with him and the Admiral’s as a dramatist, which lasted intermittently until 1602. It was broken, not only by plays for the King’s men, whose employment of him, which may have been at the Curtain, was due, according to Rowe, to the critical instinct of Shakespeare (H.-P. ii. 74), and for the Chapel children when these were established at Blackfriars in 1600, but also by a quarrel with Gabriel Spencer, whose death at his hands during a duel with swords in Hoxton Fields on 22 Sept. 1598 was ‘harde & heavey’ news to Henslowe (_Henslowe Papers_, 48) and brought Jonson to trial for murder, from which he only escaped by reading his neck-verse (Jeaffreson, _Middlesex County Records_, i. xxxviii; iv. 350; cf. Laing, 19). Jonson’s pen was critical, and to the years 1600–2 belongs the series of conflicts with other poets and with the actors generically known as the _Poetomachia_ or Stage Quarrel (cf. ch. xi). Meanwhile Jonson, perhaps encouraged by his success in introducing a mask into _Cynthia’s Revels_ (1601), seems to have conceived the ambition of becoming a Court poet. At first he was not wholly successful, and the selection of Daniel to write the chief Christmas mask of 1603–4 appears to have provoked an antagonism between the two poets, which shows itself in Jonson’s qualified acknowledgement to Lady Rutland of the favours done him by Lady Bedford (_Forest_, xii):

though she have a better verser got,
(Or poet, in the court-account) than I,
And who doth me, though I not him envy,

and long after in the remark to Drummond (Laing, 10) that ‘Daniel was at jealousies with him’. But the mask was a form of art singularly suited to Jonson’s genius. In the next year he came to his own, and of ten masks at Court during 1605–12 not less than eight are his. This employment secured him a considerable vogue as a writer of entertainments and complimentary verses, and a standing with James himself, with the Earl of Salisbury, and with other persons of honour, which not only brought him pecuniary profit, but also enabled him to withstand the political attacks made upon _Sejanus_, for which he was haled before the Council, and upon _Eastward Ho!_, for which he was once more imprisoned. During this period he continued to write plays, with no undue frequency, both for the King’s men and for the Queen’s Revels and their successors, the Lady Elizabeth’s. As a rule, he had published his plays, other than those bought by Henslowe, soon after they were produced, and in 1612 he seems to have formed the design of collecting them, with his masks and occasional verses, into a volume of Works. Probably the design was deferred, owing to his absence in France as tutor to the son of Sir Walter Raleigh, from the autumn of 1612 (_M. P._ xi. 279) to some date in 1613 earlier than 29 June, when he witnessed the burning of the Globe (_M. L. R._ iv. 83). For the same reason he took no part in the masks for the Princess Elizabeth’s wedding at Shrovetide. But he returned in time for that of the Earl of Somerset at Christmas 1613, and wrote three more masks before his folio _Works_ actually appeared in 1616. In the same year he received a royal pension of 100 marks.

Jonson’s later life can only be briefly summarized. During a visit to Scotland he paid a visit to William Drummond of Hawthornden in January 1619, and of his conversation his host took notes which preserve many biographical details and many critical utterances upon the men, books, and manners of his time. In 1621 (cf. ch. iii) he obtained a reversion of the Mastership of the Revels, which he never lived to enjoy. His masks continued until 1631, when an unfortunate quarrel with Inigo Jones brought them to an end. His play-writing, dropped after 1616, was resumed about 1625, and to this period belong his share in _The Bloody Brother_ of the Beaumont and Fletcher series, _The Staple of News_, _The New Inn_, _The Magnetic Lady_, and _The Tale of a Tub_. In 1637, probably on 6 August, he died. He had told Drummond ‘that the half of his comedies were not in print’, as well as that ‘of all his playes he never gained two hundreth pounds’ (Laing, 27, 35), and in 1631 he began the publication, by instalments, of a second volume of his Works. This was completed after his death, with the aid of Sir Kenelm Digby, in 1640 and 1641. But it did not include _The Case is Altered_, the printing of which in 1609 probably lacked his authority, or the Henslowe plays, of which his manuscripts, if he had any, may have perished when his library was burnt in 1623.

_Collections_

_F_{1}_ (_1616_)

_S. R._ 1615, Jan. 20 (Tavernour). William Stansbye, ‘Certayne Masques at the Court never yet printed written by Ben Johnson’ (Arber, iii. 562).

1616. The Workes of Beniamin Jonson. _W. Stansby, sold by Rich. Meighen._ [Contains (_a_) commendatory verses, some reprinted from Qq, signed ‘I. Selden I.C.’, ‘Ed. Heyward’, ‘Geor. Chapman’, ‘H. Holland’, ‘I. D.’, ‘E. Bolton’, and for three sets ‘Franc. Beaumont’; (_b_) nine plays, being all printed in Q, except _The Case is Altered_; (_c_) the five early entertainments; (_d_) the eleven early masks and two barriers, with separate title-page ‘Masques at Court, London, 1616’; (_e_) non-dramatic matter. For bibliographical details on both Ff., see B. Nicholson, _B. J.’s Folios and the Bibliographers_ (1870, _4 N. Q._ v. 573); Greg, _Plays_, 55, and _Masques_, xiii, 11; G. A. Aitken, _B. J.’s Works_ (_10 N. Q._ xi. 421); the introductions to the Yale editions; and B. A. P. van Dam and C. Stoffel, _The Authority of the B. J. Folio of 1616_ (1903, _Anglia_, xxvi. 377), whose conclusion that Jonson did not supervise F_{1} is not generally accepted. It is to be noted that, contrary to the usual seventeenth-century practice, some, and possibly all, of the dates assigned to productions in F_{1} follow the Circumcision and not the Annunciation style; cf. Thorndike, 17, whose demonstration leaves it conceivable that Jonson only adopted the change of style from a given date, say, 1 Jan. 1600, when it came into force in Scotland.]

_F_{2}_ (_1631–41_)

1640. The Workes of Beniamin Jonson. _Richard Bishop, sold by Andrew Crooke._ [Same contents as F_{1}.]

1640. The Workes of Benjamin Jonson. The second volume. Containing these Playes, Viz. 1 Bartholomew Fayre. 2 The Staple of Newes. 3 The Divell is an Asse. _For Richard Meighen._ [Contains (_a_) reissue of folio sheets of three plays named with separate title-pages of 1631; (_b_) _The Magnetic Lady_, _A Tale of a Tub_, _The Sad Shepherd_, _Mortimer his Fall_; (_c_) later masks; (_d_) non-dramatic matter. The editor is known to have been Sir Kenelm Digby.]

_S. R._ 1658, Sept. 17. ‘A booke called Ben Johnsons Workes ye 3^d volume containing these peeces, viz^t. Ffifteene masques at court and elsewhere. Horace his art of Poetry Englished. English Gramar. Timber or Discoveries. Underwoods consisting of divers poems. The Magnetick Lady. A Tale of a Tub. The sad shephard or a tale of Robin hood. The Devill is an asse. Salvo iure cuiuscunque. _Thomas Walkley_ (Eyre, ii. 196).

1658, Nov. 20. Transfer of ‘Ben Johnsons workes ye 3^d vol’ from Walkley to Humphrey Moseley (Eyre, ii. 206). [Neither Walkley nor Moseley ever published the _Works_.]

_F_{3}_ (_1692_)

1692. The Works of Ben Jonson, Which were formerly Printed in Two Volumes, are now Reprinted in One. To which is added a Comedy, called the New Inn. With Additions never before Published. _Thomas Hodgkin, for H. Herringham_ [&c.].

The more important of the later collections are:

1756. P. Whalley, _The Works of B. J._ 7 vols. [Adds _The Case is Altered_.]

1816, 1846. W. Gifford, _The Works of B. J._ 9 vols.

1828. J. Nichols, _The Progresses, Processions and Magnificent Festivities of King James the First_. 4 vols. [Prints the masks.]

1871, &c. W. Gifford, edited by F. Cunningham, _The Works of B. J._ 3 vols.

1875. W. Gifford, edited by F. Cunningham, _The Works of B. J._ 9 vols.

1893–5. B. Nicholson, _The Best Plays of B. J._ 3 vols. (_Mermaid Series_). [The nine plays of F_{1}.]

1905–8 (_in progress_). W. Bang, _B. J.’s Dramen in Neudruck herausgegeben nach der Folio 1616_. (_Materialien_, vi.)

1906. H. C. Hart, _The Plays of B. J._ 2 vols. (_Methuen’s Standard Library_). [_Case is Altered_, _E. M. I._, _E. M. O._, _Cynthia’s Revels_, _Poetaster_.]

In the absence of a complete modern critical edition, such as is promised by C. H. Herford and P. Simpson from the Clarendon Press, reference must usually be made to the editions of single plays in the _Yale Studies_ and _Belles Lettres Series_.

_Select Dissertations_: W. R. Chetwood, _Memoirs of the Life and Writings of B. J._ (1756); O. Gilchrist, _An Examination of the Charges of B. J.’s Enmity to Shakespeare_ (1808), _A Letter to W. Gifford_ (1811); D. Laing, _Notes of B. J.’s Conversations with Drummond of Hawthornden_ (1842, _Sh. Soc._); B. Nicholson, _The Orthography of B. J.’s Name_ (1880, _Antiquary_, ii. 55); W. Wilke, _Metrische Untersuchungen zu B. J._ (1884, _Halle diss._), _Anwendung der Rhyme-test und Double-endings test auf. B. J.’s Dramen_ (1888, _Anglia_, x. 512); J. A. Symonds, _B. J._ (1888, _English Worthies_); A. C. Swinburne, _A Study of B. J._ (1889); P. Aronstein, _B. J.’s Theorie des Lustspiels_ (1895, _Anglia_, xvii. 466), _Shakespeare and B. J._ (1904, _E. S._ xxxiv. 193); _B. J._ (1906, _Literarhistorische Forschungen_, xxxiv); E. Koeppel, _Quellen-Studien zu den Dramen B. J.’s, John Marston’s, und Beaumont und Fletcher’s_ (1895, _Münchener Beiträge_, xi), _B. J.’s Wirkung auf zeitgenössische Dramatiker_ (1906, _Anglistische Forschungen_, xx); J. H. Penniman, _The War of the Theatres_ (1897, _Pennsylvania Univ. Series_, iv. 3); E. Woodbridge, _Studies in J.’s Comedy_ (1898, _Yale Studies_, v); R. A. Small, _The Stage-Quarrel between B. J. and the so-called Poetasters_ (1899); B. Dobell, _Newly Discovered Documents_ (1901, _Athenaeum_, i. 369, 403, 433, 465); J. Hofmiller, _Die ersten sechs Masken B. J.’s in ihrem Verhältnis zur antiken Literatur_ (1901, _Freising progr._); H. C. Hart, _B. J., Gabriel Harvey and Nash_, &c. (1903–4, _9 N. Q._ xi. 201, 281, 343, 501; xii. 161, 263, 342, 403, 482; _10 N. Q._ i. 381); G. Sarrazin, _Nym und B. J._ (1904, _Jahrbuch_, xl. 212); M, Castelain, _B. J., l’Homme et l’Œuvre_ (1907); _Shakespeare and B. J._ (1907, _Revue Germanique_, iii. 21, 133); C. R. Baskervill, _English Elements in J.’s Early Comedy_ (1911, _Texas Univ. Bulletin_, 178); W. D. Briggs, _Studies in B. J._ (1913–14, _Anglia_, xxxvii. 463; xxxviii. 101), _On Certain Incidents in B. J.’s Life_ (1913, _M. P._ xi. 279), _The Birth-date of B. J._ (1918, _M. L. N._ xxxiii. 137); G. Gregory Smith, _Ben Jonson_ (1919, _English Men of Letters_); J. Q. Adams, _The Bones of Ben Jonson_ (1919, _S. P._ xvi. 289). For fuller lists, see Castelain, xxiii, and _C. H._ vi. 417.

PLAYS

_The Case is Altered. 1597 (?)-1609_

_S. R._ 1609, Jan. 26 (Segar, ‘deputy to Sir George Bucke’). ‘A booke called The case is altered.’ _Henry Walley_, _Richard Bonion_ (Arber, iii. 400).

1609, July 20. ‘Entred for their copie by direction of master Waterson warden, a booke called the case is altered whiche was entred for H. Walley and Richard Bonyon the 26 of January last.’ _Henry Walley_, _Richard Bonyon_, _Bartholomew Sutton_ (Arber, iii. 416).

1609. [Three issues, with different t.ps.]

(_a_) Ben: Ionson, His Case is Alterd. As it hath beene sundry times Acted by the Children of the Blacke-friers. _For Bartholomew Sutton._ [B.M. 644, b. 54.]

(_b_) A Pleasant Comedy, called: The Case is Alterd. As it hath beene sundry times acted by the children of the Black-friers. Written by Ben. Ionson. _For Bartholomew Sutton and William Barrenger._ [B.M. T. 492 (9); Bodl.; W. A. White.]

(_c_) A Pleasant Comedy, called: The Case is Alterd. As it hath been sundry times acted by the children of the Black-friers. _For Bartholomew Sutton and William Barrenger._ [Devonshire.]

_Edition_ by W. E. Selin (1917, _Yale Studies_, lvi).--_Dissertation_: C. Crawford, _B. J.’s C. A.: its Date_ (1909, _10 N. Q._ xi. 41).

As Nashe, _Lenten Stuff_ (_Works_, iii. 220), which was entered in S. R. on 11 Jan. 1599, refers to ‘the merry coblers cutte in that witty play of _the Case is altered_’, and as I. i chaffs Anthony Munday as ‘in print already for the best plotter’, alluding to the description of him in Francis Meres’s _Palladis Tamia_ (S. R. 7 Sept. 1598), the date would seem at first sight to be closely fixed to the last few months of 1598. But I. i has almost certainly undergone interpolation. Antonio Balladino, who appears in this scene alone, and whose dramatic function is confused with that later (II. vii) assigned to Valentine, is only introduced for the sake of a satirical portrait of Munday. He is ‘pageant poet to the City of Milan’, at any rate ‘when a worse cannot be had’. He boasts that ‘I do use as much stale stuff, though I say it myself, as any man does in that kind’, and again, ‘An they’ll give me twenty pound a play, I’ll not raise my vein’. Some ‘will have every day new tricks, and write you nothing but humours’; this pleases the gentlemen, but he is for ‘the penny’. Crawford points out that there are four quotations from the play in Bodenham’s _Belvedere_ (1600), of which Munday was the compiler, and suggests that he would have left it alone had the ridicule of himself then been a part of it. I should put the scene later still. Antonio makes an offer of ‘one of the books’ of his last pageant, and as far as is known, although Munday may have been arranging city pageants long before, the first which he printed was that for 1605. Nor does the reference to plays of ‘tricks’ and ‘humours’ necessarily imply proximity to Jonson’s own early comedies, for Day’s _Law Tricks_ and his _Humour out of Breath_, as well as probably the anonymous _Every Woman in her Humour_, belong to 1604–8. Moreover, the play was certainly on the stage about this time, since the actors are called ‘Children of Blackfriars’, although of course this would not be inconsistent with their having first produced it when they bore some other name. The text is in an odd state. Up to the end of Act III it has been arranged in scenes, on the principle usually adopted by Jonson; after ‘Actus 3 [an error for 4] Scaene 1’ there is no further division, and in Act V verse and prose are confused. As Jonson was careful about the printing of his plays, as there is no epistle, and as _C. A._ was left out of the Ff., there is some reason to suppose that the publication in this state was not due to him. Is it possible that Day, whom Jonson described to Drummond as a ‘rogue’ and a ‘base fellow’, was concerned in this transaction? It is obvious that, if I. i is a later addition, the original production may have been earlier than 1598. And the original company is unknown. The mere fact that the Children of the Blackfriars revived it shortly before 1609 does not in the least prove that it was originally written for the Children of the Chapel. If Chapman’s _All Fools_ is a Blackfriars revival of an Admiral’s play, _C. A._ might even more easily be a Blackfriars revival of a play written, say, for the extinct Pembroke’s. With the assumption that _C. A._ was a Chapel play disappears the assumption that the Chapel themselves began their renewed dramatic activities at a date earlier than the end of 1600. Selin shows a fair amount of stylistic correspondence with Jonson’s other work, but it is quite possible that, as suggested by Herford (_R. E. C._ ii. 9), he had a collaborator. If so, Chapman seems plausible.

_C. A._ has nothing to do with the _Poetomachia_. Hart (_9 N. Q._ xi. 501, xii. 161, 263) finds in the vocabulary of Juniper a parody of the affected phraseology of Gabriel Harvey, and in the critical attitude of Valentine a foreshadowing of such autobiographical studies as that of Asper in _E. M. O._ His suggestion that the cudgel-play between Onion and Martino in II. vii represents the controversy between Nashe and Martin Marprelate is perhaps less plausible. Nashe would be very likely to think the chaff of Harvey ‘witty’.

_Every Man In his Humour. 1598_

_S. R._ [1600], Aug. 4. ‘Euery man in his humour, a booke ... to be staied’ (Arber, iii. 37). [_As You Like It_, _Henry V_, and _Much Ado about Nothing_ are included in the entry, which appears to be an exceptional memorandum. The year 1600 is conjectured from the fact that the entry follows another of May 1600.]

1600, Aug. 14 (Pasfield). ‘A booke called Euery man in his humour.’ _Burby and Walter Burre_ (Arber, iii. 169).

1609, Oct. 16. Transfer of Mrs. Burby’s share to Welby (Arber, iii. 421).

1601. Every Man In his Humor. As it hath beene sundry times publickly acted by the right Honorable the Lord Chamberlaine his seruants. Written by Ben. Iohnson. _For Walter Burre._

1616. Euery Man In His Humour. A Comœdie. Acted in the yeere 1598. By the then Lord Chamberlaine his Seruants. The Author B. I. _By William Stansby._ [Part of F_{1}. Epistle to William Camden, signed ‘Ben. Ionson’, and Prologue. After text: ‘This Comoedie was first Acted, in the yeere 1598. By the then L. Chamberlayne his Seruants. The principall Comœdians were, Will. Shakespeare, Ric. Burbadge, Aug. Philips, Ioh. Hemings, Hen. Condel, Tho. Pope, Will. Slye, Chr. Beeston, Will. Kempe, Ioh. Duke. With the allowance of the Master of Revells.’]

_Editions_ by W. Scott (1811, _M. B. D._ iii), H. B. Wheatley (1877), W. M. Dixon (1901, _T. D._), H. Maas (1901, _Rostock diss._), W. A. Neilson (1911, _C. E. D._), C. H. Herford (1913, _R. E. C._ ii), P. Simpson (1919), H. H. Carter (1921, _Yale Studies_, lii), and facsimile reprints of Q_{1} by C. Grabau (1902, _Jahrbuch_, xxxviii. 1), W. Bang and W. W. Greg (1905, _Materialien_, x).--_Dissertations_: A. Buff, _The Quarto Edition of B. J.’s E. M. I._ (1877, _E. S._ i. 181), B. Nicholson, _On the Dates of the Two Versions of E. M. I._ (1882, _Antiquary_, vi. 15, 106).

The date assigned by F_{1} is confirmed by an allusion (IV. iv. 15) to the ‘fencing Burgullian’ or Burgundian, John Barrose, who challenged all fencers in that year, and was hanged for murder on 10 July (Stowe, _Annales_, 787). The production must have been shortly before 20 Sept, when Toby Mathew wrote to Dudley Carleton (_S. P. D. Eliz._ cclxviii. 61; Simpson, ix) of an Almain who lost 300 crowns at ‘a new play called, Euery mans humour’. Two short passages were taken from the play in R. Allot’s _England’s Parnassus_ (1600, ed. Crawford, xxxii. 110, 112, 436) which is earlier than Q_{1}. The Q_{1} text (I. i. 184) contains a hit at Anthony Munday in ‘that he liue in more penurie of wit and inuention, then eyther the Hall-Beadle, or Poet Nuntius’. This has disappeared from F_{1}, which in other respects represents a complete revision of the Q_{1} text. Many passages have been improved from a literary point of view; the scene has been transferred from Italy to London and the names anglicized; the oaths have all been expunged or softened. Fleay, i. 358, finding references to a ‘queen’ in F_{1} for the ‘duke’ of Q_{1} and an apparent dating of St. Mark’s Day on a Friday, assigned the revision to 1601, and conjectured that it was done by Jonson for the Chapel, that the Chamberlain’s published the Q in revenge, and that Jonson tried to stay it. Here he is followed by Castelain. But Q_{1} is a good edition and there is no sign whatever that it had not Jonson’s authority, and as the entry in S. R. covers other Chamberlain’s plays, it is pretty clear that the company caused the ‘staying’. St. Mark’s Day did not, as Fleay thought, fall on a Friday in 1601, and if it had, the dating is unchanged from Q_{1} and the references to a queen may, as Simpson suggests, be due to Jonson’s conscientious desire to preserve consistency with the original date of 1598. Nor is the play likely to have passed to the Chapel, since the King’s men played it before James on 2 Feb. 1605 (cf. App. B). This revival would be the natural time for a revision, and in fact seems to me on the whole the most likely date, in spite of two trifling bits of evidence which would fit in rather better a year later. These are references to the siege of Strigonium or Graan (1595) as ten years since (III. i. 103), and to a present by the Turkey company to the Grand Signior (I. ii. 78), which was perhaps the gift worth £5,000 sent about Christmas 1605 (_S. P. D. Jac. I_, xv. 3; xvii. 35; xx. 27). No doubt also the revision of oaths in Jacobean plays is usually taken as due to the _Act against Abuses of Players_ (1606), although it is conceivable that the personal taste of James may have required a similar revision of plays selected for Court performance at an earlier date. Or this particular bit of revision, which was done for other plays before F_{1}, may be of later date than the rest. Simpson is in favour, largely on literary grounds, for a revision in 1612, in preparation for F_{1}. The Prologue, which is not in Q, probably belongs to the revision, or at any rate to a revival later than 1598, since it criticizes not only ‘Yorke, and Lancasters long jarres’, but also plays in which ‘Chorus wafts you ore the seas’, as in _Henry V_ (1599). These allusions would not come so well in 1612; on the other hand, Simpson’s date would enable us to suppose that the play in which the public ‘grac’d monsters’ was the _Tempest_ (cf. the similar jibe in _Bartholomew Fair_). The character Matheo or Mathew represents a young gull of literary tendencies, and is made to spout passages from, or imitations of, Daniel’s verses. Perhaps this implies some indirect criticism of Daniel, but it can hardly be regarded as a personal attack upon him.

_Every Man Out of his Humour. 1599_

_S. R._ 1600, April 8 (Harsnett). ‘A Comicall Satyre of euery man out of his humour.’ _William Holme_ (Arber, iii. 159).

1638, April 28. Transfer by Smethwicke to Bishop (Arber, iv. 417).